On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 05:31:30PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Kanda Motohiro reported that expanding a tiny xattr into a large xattr > fails on XFS because we remove the tiny xattr from a shortform fork and > then try to re-add it after converting the fork to extents format having > not removed the ATTR_REPLACE flag. This fails because the attr is no > longer present, causing a fs shutdown. > > This is derived from the patch in his bug report, but we really > shouldn't ignore a nonzero retval from the remove call. Something's > broken and we should bail out and shut down. > > Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=199119 > Reported-by: kanda.motohiro@xxxxxxxxx > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c | 9 ++++++++- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c > index ce4a34a..2588c73 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c > @@ -511,7 +511,14 @@ xfs_attr_shortform_addname(xfs_da_args_t *args) > if (args->flags & ATTR_CREATE) > return retval; > retval = xfs_attr_shortform_remove(args); > - ASSERT(retval == 0); > + if (retval) > + return retval; > + /* > + * Since we have removed the old attr here, > + * further lookup will fail with ENOATTR. > + * Ignore this was a replace and go on creating new attr. The last line of that comment doesn't make sense to me. not sure what it's meant to say... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
